ACLU claims ratings, V-chip stifles TV

Although a court challenge to the TV-rating system and the V-chip isn't yet brewing, an American Civil Liberties Union official said her group stands ready to accept a case against the Federal Communications Commission-approved program.

“We don't have anything in the works yet, but we'd accept a case,” said Marjorie Heins, director of the ACLU's Arts Censorship Project.

The FCC last week officially approved a voluntary rating system crafted last year by broadcasters, parent advocacy groups and the Motion Picture Association of America.

While the rating system remains a voluntary program, the commission ordered manufacturers to begin making television sets that can block programs based on those rating codes. The new TVs equipped with the blocking technology, called V-chips, are expected to be available by the end of the year.

According to new commission rules, television manufacturers must include V-chips on at least half of their models with picture screens of 13 inches or larger by July 1, 1999, and on all of their products by Jan. 1, 2000. The commission also requires personal computers with television tuners and 13-inch screens or larger to include the V-chip.

The V-chip is designed to read the six age-group designations, which range from Y, which is rated suitable for children of all ages to TV-MA, which is rated unsuitable for children under 17. Parents could also block programming designated with content codes: V for violence, S for sexual content, L for foul language and D for sexually suggestive dialogue.

FCC Chairman William Kennard praised the standards saying the combination of a rating system and the V-chip “will give parents the tools and power to make their own decisions about television programs they do not feel are appropriate for their children.”

But opponents to the recently approved rating system for television programming say directors and producers may resort to mutilating their work just so they won't get stuck with adult ratings.

“An acclaimed documentary such as Civil War or Eyes on the Prize — which clearly contained lots of
violence, as is appropriate for that subject matter — may be reduced if threatened with a violence-rating,” Heins said.

The rating system was developed in response to the 1996 federal Telecommunications Act. That law required the television industry to find ways to enable parents to block objectionable programs from their homes or else the FCC would step in and do it.

Most of the networks refused to comply with portions of the 1996 Telecommunications Act on grounds that it raised serious First Amendment concerns. But because the law asked for a voluntary, industry-developed system, most eventually relented.

John Earnhardt, spokesman for the National Association of Broadcasters, said the program is completely voluntary and that there is no pressure for the networks to comply.

“Now, if it were a mandated program, there would be some serious First Amendment problems,” Earnhardt said.

But the ACLU, which rallied against the ratings program and V-chip when those issues appeared before Congress, remains a strong opponent. In its reports on the V-chip, the ACLU said the threat of FCC intervention if the television industry failed to devise a rating program amounts to censorship.

“Any claims that the TV rating system is voluntary is belied by the existence of the statute, which strongly pressures the industry to create the rating system,” Heins said. “It's clearly not just an innocuous program to provide information to parents.”

Heins points to the continuing pressure from legislators on the remaining holdouts to the rating system as evidence that the program is not really voluntary. “It's inappropriate for government officials to be exercising that kind of coercive pressure on the media,” she said.

Two networks, NBC and Black Entertainment Television, do not use the complete rating systems. NBC has stayed with a simpler age-appropriate rating system while BET doesn't use one at all.

Rep. Edward Markey, the Massachusetts Democrat who spearheaded the V-chip legislation, said the two networks were essentially “asserting their rights to plant a 'bug' in the system. Just as a 'bug' in a computer does not render the computer useless, the NBC/BET virus will not significantly harm the operation of the V-chip on every other channel.

“But it is a nuisance and a pain and is totally unnecessary.”

But Harold Furchgott-Roth, a Republican named to the FCC last October, praised the two networks for using their own judgment. He said those networks should look to their viewing audience, not the government, for guidance.

“I salute the courage and fortitude of those programmers, such as NBC and BET, who have resisted political pressure to effectively convert these voluntary guidelines into mandatory regulations,” Furchgott-Roth said. “They should be commended, not condemned, for their independence of mind.”

More articles related to First Amendment News.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.

THE EXPERTS

The First Amendment Center is an educational organization and cannot provide legal advice.

Ken Paulson is president of the First Amendment Center and dean of the College of Mass Communication at Middle Tennessee State University. He is also the former editor-in-chief of USA Today.

Gene Policinski, chief operating officer of the Newseum Institute, also is senior vice president of the First Amendment Center, a center of the institute. He is a veteran journalist whose career has included work in newspapers, radio, television and online.

John Seigenthaler founded the Newseum Institute’s First Amendment Center in 1991 with the mission of creating national discussion, dialogue and debate about First Amendment rights and values.

About The First Amendment Center

We support the First Amendment and build understanding of its core freedoms through education, information and entertainment.

The center serves as a forum for the study and exploration of free-expression issues, including freedom of speech, of the press and of religion, and the rights to assemble and to petition the government.

Founded by John Seigenthaler, the First Amendment Center is an operating program of the Freedom Forum and is associated with the Newseum and the Diversity Institute. The center has offices in the John Seigenthaler Center at Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tenn., and at the Newseum in Washington, D.C.

The center’s website, www.firstamendmentcenter.org, is one of the most authoritative sources of news, information and commentary in the nation on First Amendment issues. It features daily updates on news about First Amendment-related developments, as well as detailed reports about U.S. Supreme Court cases involving the First Amendment, and commentary, analysis and special reports on free expression, press freedom and religious-liberty issues. Support the work of the First Amendment Center.

1 For All

1 for All is a national nonpartisan program designed to build understanding and support for First Amendment freedoms. 1 for All provides teaching materials to the nation’s schools, supports educational events on America’s campuses and reminds the public that the First Amendment serves everyone, regardless of faith, race, gender or political leanings. It is truly one amendment for all. Visit 1 for All at http://1forall.us/

Help tomorrow’s citizens find their voice: Teach the First Amendment

The most basic liberties guaranteed to Americans – embodied in the 45 words of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution – assure Americans a government that is responsible to its citizens and responsive to their wishes.

These 45 words are as alive and important today as they were more than 200 years ago. These liberties are neither liberal nor conservative, Democratic nor Republican – they are the basis for our representative democratic form of government.

We know from studies beginning in 1997 by the nonpartisan First Amendment Center, and from studies commissioned by the Knight Foundation and others, that few adult Americans or high school students can name the individual five freedoms that make up the First Amendment.

The lesson plans – drawn from materials prepared by the Newseum and the First Amendment Center – will draw young people into an exploration of how their freedoms began and how they operate in today’s world. Students will discuss just how far individual rights extend, examining rights in the school environment and public places. The lessons may be used in history and government, civics, language arts and journalism, art and debate classes. They may be used in sections or in their entirety. Many of these lesson plans indicate an overall goal, offer suggestions on how to teach the lesson and list additional resources and enrichment activities.

First Amendment Moot Court Competition

This site no longer is being updated … And the competition itself is moving to Washington, D.C., where the Newseum Institute’s First Amendment Center is co-sponsoring the “Seigenthaler-Sutherland Cup National First Amendment Moot Court Competition,” March 18-19, in partnership with the Columbus School of Law, of the Catholic University of America.

During the two-day competition in February, each team will participate in a minimum of four rounds, arguing a hypothetical based on a current First Amendment controversy before panels of accomplished jurists, legal scholars and attorneys.

FIRST AMENDMENT CENTER ARCHIVES

State of the First Amendment survey reports

The State of the First Amendment surveys, commissioned since 1997 by the First Amendment Center and Newseum, are a regular check on how Americans view their first freedoms of speech, press, assembly, religion and petition.

The periodic surveys examine public attitudes toward freedom of speech, press, religion and the rights of assembly and petition; and sample public opinion on contemporary issues involving those freedoms.
See the reports.